New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1887-04-30
SHARP MUST STAND TRIAL.
MOTION 70 DISMISS THE CASE DENIED.

JUDGE VAN BRUNT PROMPTLY RULES THAT THE
| INDICTMENT is VALID.
| Justice Van Brunt in the Court OF oyer ana
Termner yesterday made short work OF Jacob Sharp
motion to dismiss the indi distments against him. Sharp
came into court looking worse than any OF the
boode" defendants who have preceded him. His
| color was ohalk-like. Albert Stickney, Homer Y.
Nelson and James C. Carter appeared as his attorneys
Mr. Carter is in the only to argue the motion TO
aside the indictment He is not expected to appear
in the trial proper The District-Atorneys oftce was
represented b. Mr.. Nco and Mr. Semple Mr. Nicoll
made all the arguments. The courtroom was
crowded.
Mr.. Stickney opened the for the defendant by
moving to quash all of the twenty-one indictments
pending against Sharp upon two general grounds
First that illegal evidence was produced before the
Grand jury chiefly Shar1's own compulsory testi-
mony given before the Senate Committee secondly.
that excluding this illegal evidence or even with IL
there sufficient evidence upon which to BRING
indictment AIR. Stckney said that he would re-
serve any observations the defence desired to make
till the court was informed to the contents OF the
moviag papers and of those offered in reply by the
Distuct-Attorney.
"Read the papers," said Judge Van Brunt.
Then understand that your Honor will hear the
notion"
"The court makes promises at ALL 1t must first
hear your papers"
Mr. StclSney went on to state the contents of his
papers His adavits alleged that the sources of the
said:
onr DO rest and 6sPGq5 n,m.S
iso ,o II, y % ~ @ @ ~ ib1s CO.
to obtain the minutes OF s Grand Jury which indicted MIN
acknow eged that tho dctmens had been fully indorsed
% be true hSn Know Just What went ON in tGs Grand
M yo n bS m sSSe tho NO crsy syGS as1s Il the
Surface Company and Mr. Ryan, the secretary OF the Broad
way era Seventh Ayenae SIMPLY proved rsGoaSS eS n %
produced only transcript Mr. shsrp Positively
mr. a Ke a MIR Mr. Paw 0i
IN s ia ba & Tsro R s he Moonsy
leave there once with package and that he had had two IN
The a5ed and You'd P1s' a the o c gyer o
reported to have been expended IN xnS the Aldermen MI
There vas ert for The Grand jury to act upon therefore,
nothing but the Of Kerr Fofay aHd sharp m a
way nd seventh Avenne Company had issued 100000
by them deposit vault until June 1885 when they
pad oyer to sharp ME- shap ad tgSt no a hdn a % e s nro
ceeds Of which he could not entirely account for
This was all the evidence bei)rc the Grand Jury.
and he asked the dismissal OF any indictments brought
upon such illegal and insufficient evidence
In reply to tins Mr.. Ncoll read affidavit signed
by Mr.. MARITIME reciting that in October last Sharp
indicted, arrested and admitted to bail lie had
several co-deiendants, az many of whom we're also
arrested had not fed from the jurisdiction OF the
court Twcnty-thrae days had been allowed Sharp
before pleading. Then at his request ten days more
were given him. Instead of moving then TO dismiss
the Indictment. he and Mr. Richmond made motions
Tor On examination OF the Grand Jurys minutes
Sharp aiterward withdrew this motion and pleaded
not guilty" Six months had ELAPSED since then and
now On the eve OF his trial he brought this notion
Mr. MARITIME declined utterly TO answer any OF the
allegations OF the deeuce and insisted that the motion
was improper OF this Tine
Mr.. Stic6ncy then argrcd ia support OF his motion,
citing hosts precedenis Mr. Nicoll argued against
him. picking his precedents to pieces. Mr.. Carter
went tO bis colleagues rescue, lugging IN more pre-.
celonts, law and more eloquence. Mr.. NicoI
attacked Mr. Jarters position, claiming that the new
code Governed the that IL provided three ways
aud y three ot meeting an indictment moving TO
set - le demurrng or pleading that tho choice OF
one declared the defendant from ayailing himself
OF tc others; that Sharp had pleaded; ; that this OF
tseh kuockc., the pins from under Mr. Slickney, and
~ for those under Mr. Carter they were demolished
by the Court OF Appeals In the OF the People vs.
Slleck. IN which it held that no ground outside
those specified in the code coul justify dismissal
of Indictment. The Legislature having provided
certain ways OF quashng indictments II follows that
other wly- excluded from its intent.
judge Van Brunt SUSTAINED this position and DIS
missed the motion = T. Ia old adage," he said,
Z that hatd make bad law The court has
nothing 10 do with the question OF hardship. u must
apply the law The Appellate Court has decided in
the 92d OF Ncwlork tnat the action ot Grand jury
can be set aside only in certain specified ways. The
distinction drawn by counsel between that case ana
the bar cannot do not think Mr. Sharp
has been deprived OF any constitutional right The
motion is dismissed